Tuesday, June 25, 2013

The case for electoral reforms - Sakmongkol AK47

The case for electoral reforms - Sakmongkol AK47

June 24, 2013

Malaysian Insider-Side Views

One of the most important objectives of the Black 505 Rally
that took place on the 22 of June (622) was to ask for the resignation
of the chiefs of SPR. It stands accused of impartiality, perpetuating
and abetting electoral fraud, refusing to clean the electoral rolls and
acting hapless when called upon to act on the massive discrepancies in
electoral registers. The Chairman and the Deputy of the EC stood out as
exemplars of Little Stalins impervious to demands for the EC to
facilitate democracy not to hinder and suffocate it.

Never in the history of Malaysia, has the SPR been overtly political.
The two people helming SPR are seen to be the most politically
proactive. Their political adventures and frolics lead people to
justifiably conclude that the SPR is but another satellite of the BN. it
is a tool serving the interests of the BN government. It therefore
stands of the side of the Oppressor.

Our SPR has complete lost its credibility and integrity as an
independent commission answerable to The Agong. Does the Agong
countenance fraud and partiality of the SPR? The SPR must not only
actually behave with extreme impartiality, but it must also be seen to
behave as such.

With the SPR unmoved and bull-headed, we are going to be far way yet
from radical electoral reforms- that is, if we are thinking about asking
the present government to adopt proportional representation or
something like that. The SPR has positioned itself as an utterly
unreasonable umpire; declining to direct itself to address the issues
that are wholly under its responsibility.(1) Clean the electoral rolls
(2) perform its duties honestly and with integrity (3) justify itself as
an instrument facilitating democracy.

Let us begin by asking the EC to do the most basic things first. Tackle the issues of gerrymandering and mal-apportionment.
Boundaries are drawn and redrawn by the incumbent so as to give them
advantage. Hence, the average voter density for BN candidates as a whole
is less than voter density in PR constituencies.

And yet this argument cannot be carried too far so as to invite
unreasonable fears on the incumbent government. Only certain states show
the problem is serious.

Pahang for example has the curious anomaly that the number of
eligible voters in Pekan is 80,000. It is bigger than the voting public
in Kuantan. Maybe it’s time to split up the Pekan parliament into two.
It’s strange to realise that a part which is physically in Kuantan is in
the Pekan parliamentary area. The army camp at the 9th Mile Kuantan-KL
road is a case in point. Najib can have his 50,000 voting public and
allow EC to create an additional parliamentary area for Pekan.

The problem is most pronounced in Selangor. The 5 parliamentary seats
won by BN have an average voter density of 54,000. The average density
for the 17 seats won by Pakatan is 99,000. Every seat won by Pakatan is
worth 2 BN seats. Clearly Selangor is the top candidate to address the
issue of gerrymandering.
If the average voter density desired is around 54,000 then, Selangor
can create another 30 seats. The voter density for Pakatan ranges from
80,000 in PJ Selatan to 144,000 in Kapar. The median density for Pakatan
is 112,000. You can see the glaring injustice in voter apportionment.

In Kelantan, Tumpat, Kota Bharu and Bachok are possible candidates
for re-delineation as they have abnormal voter density for that state.
In Kedah the places with high voter density are (1) Kuala Kedah (2)
Pendang (3) Pokok Sena(4) Merbok (5) Sungai Petani and (6) Baling. In
Terengganu, constituencies such as KT,Kemaman and Marang have higher
voter density than the rest in Terengganu.

The spectre of unwanted revised delineation is not too scary for the BN government.

Was the average voter represented by the party of their choice? BN
got 133 seats supported by 5.24 million voters. BN has 47 per cent of
the total votes but obtained 60 per centof the parliamentary votes.
Surely this is a travesty of natural justice. PR won 50 per cent of the
popular votes but had to accept 40 per cent of the parliamentary seats.
You end up with the result that 50 per cent of the voters felt they are
not represented at all. That is because, we followed the winner takes
all electoral system which we inherited from the British Raj.

Umno and BN won the day only because they are saved by the ill effects of gerrymandering and mal-apportionment.

An honest SPR/EC
The good things we disinherit. When the first elections were held in
1955, we did not need polling and counting agents. Election officials
did their work honestly. Contestants did what they must do at that time-
contest against each other. The business of managing the electoral
process was left with the elections officials at that time./p>

They took care of everything mindful of their impartiality and desire
to present the true results. After voting closed, contestants could get
back to their houses and allowed the elections people do the counting.
Contestants could trust these officials not tempering with the counting,
not allowing people to vote twice, not allowing non-citizens to vote.
Contestants were called after the counting finished and assembled at the
town or municipal hall to hear the declaration of the outcome. -
sakmongkol.blogspot.com

* SakmongkolAK47 is the nom de plume of Datuk Mohd Ariff Sabri Abdul Aziz, the MP for Raub.